U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Falls Silent

in Face of SUBPOENA for Tax Liability Statutes




Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Counselor at Law, Federal Witness

and Private Attorney General


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                        November 7, 2002 A.D.


San Diego, California.  Paul H. O’Neill, Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Treasury in Washington, D.C., has now defaulted by falling silent in the face of a civil SUBPOENA issued by the Article III federal court in Santa Ana, California.

The Clerk of that court commanded Secretary O’Neill to produce certified copies of all federal Statutes at Large which create a specific liability for income taxes imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code.  All Acts of Congress are first published in the Statutes at Large;  some are later codified in the U.S. Code.

The deadline for complying with the SUBPOENA was midnight on Friday, November 1, 2002 A.D.  The SUBPOENA was mailed by this writer on September 14, 2002 A.D. via Registered U.S. Mail from the airport Post Office in San Diego, California, with Return Receipt requested.  A courtesy reminder was mailed on October 15, 2002 A.D.

The SUBPOENA was issued with detailed directions for delivery of the certified statutes to a list of several litigants and other key players in as many federal and State court cases.  The federal cases included proceedings now underway at the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeal, and federal district courts.

A Florida State case was also listed, because it seeks to nullify four bogus Notices of Federal Tax Lien filed against a retired physician at a County Recorder’s office there.

The focus of the SUBPOENA has arisen from many years of concerted research and activism to expose the Internal Revenue Code as a massive fiscal fraud upon the American People.

Specifically, a key authority from American Jurisprudence, a popular legal encyclopedia, states that an administrative agency may not create any liability not sanctioned by the lawmaking authority, especially a liability for a tax.  2 Am Jur 2d, page 129.

This key authority was first discovered when this author was busy answering the enormous volume of correspondence generated by the first edition of “The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of Internal Revenue.”

Later editions quoted American Jurisprudence in a letter published in Appendix “P” of that book.  Some appendices in “The Federal Zone” are so large, this detail went mostly unnoticed by the book’s many readers.  Printed copies of “The Federal Zone” are now sold without appendices, in order to reduce shipping bulk.

As more evidence accumulated, primarily for purposes of filing affidavits and preparing testimony for State and federal litigation, this author wrote another document entitled “31 Questions and Answers about the Internal Revenue Service,” abbreviated “31Q&A”.  Initial versions of 31Q&A cited the key authority at issue here by reference to “2 Am Jur 2d, page 129.”  See the Answer to Question #8 in 31Q&A.

Oddly, 31Q&A readers who bothered to check, later returned to report this citation had been removed from American Jurisprudence.

Now the hunt was on to locate the missing original authority.

This writer scheduled time to approach a professional reference librarian at the downtown law library in San Diego, California.  Fortunately, he confirmed that American Jurisprudence had been revised since 1992, and then he succeeded in locating the preceding edition in locked archives at that law library.

It was a moment to remember:  Mike says, “Here are those older volumes, Paul.  Do you have the exact citation?”  Paul says, “Yes.  It’s 2 Am Jur 2d, page 129.”  Mike reaches for Volume 2, opens it to page 129, and hands this page to Paul.  “Does this look familiar?” Mike asks.  “Let me read it to you,” answers Paul.

After reading the key authority and the corresponding footnote which cites the case of Commissioner v. Acker, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1959, Mike replied, “You have a Supreme Court authority there.  It doesn’t get any better than that!”

It was a quiet moment of triumph for this writer, capping 12 full years of concerted effort ‑‑ real blood, sweat and tears ‑‑ all required to dismantle the Internal Revenue Service once and for all.

Now that Secretary of the Treasury Paul H. O’Neill has fallen silent in the face of a proper and lawful SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE for the missing liability statutes, the wheels of justice are expected to grind out an unavoidable solution from here on.

Specifically, laws governing the federal courts authorize parties to compel answers to SUBPOENAs, and to move those courts for sanctions such as contempt of court.  Recently, another member of President George Bush’s cabinet was held in contempt by a federal district court;  thus, ample court precedent exists to hold O’Neill in contempt of court ‑‑ for not answering.  Only time will tell if such contempt proceedings will escalate to the level of a criminal investigation.

On a much broader scale, the absence of liability statutes raises the specter of widespread government fraud, going all the way back to the year 1913.  And, there is no statute of limitations on fraud.

The main problem which the SUBPOENA seeks to solve is to confirm, once and for all, the apparent absence of any federal statutes which create a specific liability for income taxes imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code.

Even though the federal regulations for IRC section 1 do create a specific liability for federal citizens and for resident aliens, that section of the IRC does not create a specific liability for these two classes of people.

The Acker decision by the U.S. Supreme Court is clear and unequivocal in holding that regulations cannot exceed the underlying statutory authority.  See Commissioner v. Acker, 361 U.S. 87 (1959).

Examples of liability statutes can be found at IRC section 1461 for withholding agents, and section 3403 for federal employment taxes.

Clearly, until withholding agents remit the taxes they have withheld, they are made specifically liable for those taxes by section 1461.  Likewise, the Public Salary Tax Act creates a specific liability for taxes imposed upon the privilege of employment with the federal government.

These legal details are explained clearly in 31Q&A.

The absence of any statutes creating a specific liability for subtitle A income taxes means, quite simply, that federal income taxes are totally and completely voluntary, in the common everyday meaning of that term.  Liability only begins when Form 1040 is signed.

Further stunning proof that these taxes are truly voluntary can be found at IRC section 3402(n).  Here, Congress has authorized a form called the “withholding exemption certificate” abbreviated “WEC”.  The term “withholding exemption certificate” occurs a total of seventeen (17) times in that one statute alone.

However, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) has never created an official form for the WEC.

Making matters much worse, it is now becoming painfully clear that all federal judges are material witnesses to the practice of concealing the withholding exemption certificate from them, when they were first hired by the federal judiciary.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has openly admitted, to a class of law students at the University of Arizona, that all federal judges are currently paying taxes on their pay, without exception.

If federal judges are material witnesses to the subject matter before them, such as federal taxes, the statute at 28 U.S.C. 455 expressly prohibits them from presiding on all such cases.  Federal judges are also immune from taxation on their pay, by constitutional mandate.  See Article III, Section 1, in the U.S. Constitution.

The implications of this conflict of interest are quite far-reaching, touching as they do literally thousands of court cases which have been decided by federal judges whose compensations have been diminished, contrary to the fundamental Law in our Constitution.  Again, further details are fully explained in 31Q&A.

Paul Andrew Mitchell encourages all Americans to read the on-line version of 31Q&A, and to follow the numerous working hyperlinks to the mountain of supporting evidence, at Internet URL:




Certified and embossed copies of 31Q&A are available from the Supreme Law Firm for $30.  A referral program also makes it possible for buyers to get their money back, and to make a little profit too, by referring others to this immensely important document.

The SUBPOENA, PROOF OF SERVICE, and Delivery Instructions can be accessed at Internet URL:




The .gif files (Graphics Interchange Format) were output by a modern scanner.  These can be enlarged or reduced by using the IMAGING program at START | PROGRAMS | ACCESSORIES in Microsoft Windows 98.

Alternatively, right click on a .gif file, then SAVE AS to your local hard disk, for viewing with any of a number of graphics programs that now abound for computers with Microsoft Windows software.

Image resizing is also automatic with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 6.0.2600+.  Click on Tools | Internet Options | Advanced, scroll down to “Multimedia”, then “Enable Automatic Image Resizing”.

Progress with SUBPOENA enforcement will be reported at the Supreme Law Library.  See the Update Highlights at supremelaw.org.